In vitro evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 Tesla on clonogenic ability, proliferation, and cell cycle in human embryonic lung fibroblasts

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 212-217

  Schwenzer, Nina F ^a   Bantleon, Rüdiger ^a   Maurer, Brigitte ^a   Kehlbach, Rainer ^a   Herberts, Tina ^a   Claussen, Claus D ^a   Rodegerdts, Enno ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cell cycle analysis; Fibroblasts; Magnetic fields; Magnetic resonance; Proliferation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CELL CYCLE; CELL LINE; CELL PROLIFERATION; CLONOGENIC ASSAY; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMBRYO; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; IN VITRO STUDY; LUNG FIBROBLAST; MAGNETIC FIELD; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 33947114396     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000255831.40115.83     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Repacholi MH. Low-level exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields: health effects and research needs. Bioelectromagnetics. 1998;19:1-19.
2. Repacholi MH. WHO's health risk assessment of ELF fields. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2003;106:297-299.
3. Repacholi M, Greenbaum B. Interaction of static and extremely low frequency electric and magnetic fields with living systems: health effects and research needs. Bioelectromagnetics. 1999;20:133-160.
4. Runge VM, Case RS, Sonnier HL. Advances in clinical 3-Tesla neuroimaging. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:63-67.
5. Fenchel M, Nael K, Deshpande VS, et al. Renal magnetic resonance angiography at 3. 0 Tesla using a 32-element phased-array coil system and parallel imaging in 2 directions. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:697-703.
6. Kramer U, Nael K, Laub G, et al. High-resolution magnetic resonance angiography of the renal arteries using parallel imaging acquisition techniques at 3.0 T: initial experience. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:125-132.
7. Yip YP, Capriotti C, Talagala SL, et al. Effects of MR exposure at 1.5 T on early embryonic development of the chick. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1994;4:742-748.
8. Tyndall DA, Sulik KK. Effects of magnetic resonance imaging on eye development in the C57BL/6J mouse. Teratology. 1991;43:263-275.
9. Tyndall DA. MRI effects on craniofacial size and crown-rump length in C57BL/6J mice in 1.5T fields. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1993;76:655-660.
10. Farrell JM, Litovitz TL, Penafiel M, et al. The effect of pulsed and sinusoidal magnetic fields on the morphology of developing chick embryos. Bioelectromagnetics. 1997;18:431-438.
11. Narra VR, Howell RW, Goddu SM, et al. Effects of a 1.5-Tesla static magnetic field on spermatogenesis and embryogenesis in mice. Invest Radiol. 1996;31:586-590.
12. Carnes KI, Magin RL. Effects of in utero exposure to 4.7 T MR imaging conditions on fetal growth and testicular development in the mouse. Magn Reson Imaging. 1996;14:263-274.
13. Murakami J, Torii Y, Masuda K. Fetal development of mice following intrauterine exposure to a static magnetic field of 6.3 T. Magn Reson Imaging. 1992;10:433- 437.
14. BfS. Empfehlungen zur Vermeidung gesundheitlicher Risiken bei Anwendung magnetischer Resonanzverfahren in der medizinischen Diagnostik: Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz: Geschäftsstelle der Strahlenschutzkommission; 1998.
15. Bernhardt JH, Vogel E. [Prevention of health risks in the use of MRI procedures. Recommendations of the Radiation Protection Commission]. Radiologe. 1998;38:737-742.
16. McDonald F. Effect of static magnetic fields on osteoblasts and fibroblasts in vitro. Bioelectromagnetics. 1993;14:187-196.
17. Raylman R, Clavo A, Wahl R. Exposure to strong static magnetic field slows the growth of human cancer cells in vitro. Bioelectromagnetics. 1996;17:358-363.
18. Nakahara T, Yaguchi H, Yoshida M, et al. Effects of exposure of CHO-K1 cells to a 10-T static magnetic field. Radiology. 2002;224:817-822.
19. Onodera H, Jin Z, Chida S, et al. Effects of 10-T static magnetic field on human peripheral blood immune cells. Radiat Res. 2003;159:775-779.
20. Geard CR, Osmak RS, Hall EJ, et al. Magnetic resonance and ionizing radiation: a comparative evaluation in vitro of oncogenic and genotoxic potential. Radiology. 1984;152:199-202.
21. McCann J, Dietrich F, Rafferty C, et al. A critical review of the genotoxic potential of electric and magnetic fields. Mutat Res. 1993;297:61-95.
22. Wolff S, James TL, Young GB, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging: absence of in vitro cytogenetic damage. Radiology. 1985;155:163-165.
23. Adair RK. Extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields do not interact directly with DNA. Bioelectromagnetics. 1998;19:136-138.
24. Lee JS, Ahn SS, Jung KC, et al. Effects of 60 Hz electromagnetic field exposure on testicular germ cell apoptosis in mice. Asian J Androl. 2004;6:29-34.
25. Santoro N, Lisi A, Pozzi D, et al. Effect of extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic field exposure on morphological and biophysical properties of human lymphoid cell line (Raji). Biochim Biophys Acta. 1997;1357:281-290.
26. Simko M, Kriehuber R, Weiss DG, et al. Effects of 50 Hz EMF exposure on micronucleus formation and apoptosis in transformed and nontransformed human cell lines. Bioelectromagnetics. 1998;19:85-91.
27. Schwenzer NF, Gronewaller EF, Rodegerdts E, et al. MRI-compatible incubation chamber for cell culture experiments. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;23:70-76.
28. Hiraoka M, Miyakoshi J, Li YP, et al. Induction of c-fos gene expression by exposure to a static magnetic field in HeLaS3 cells. Cancer Res. 1992;52:6522-6524.
29. Guisasola C, Desco M, Millan O, et al. Biological dosimetry of magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2002;15(5):584-590.
30. Fanelli C, Coppola S, Barone R, et al. Magnetic fields increase cell survival by inhibiting apoptosis via modulation of Ca2+ influx. Faseb J. 1999;13:95-102.
31. Tofani S, Cintorino M, Barone D, et al. Increased mouse survival, tumor growth inhibition and decreased immunoreactive p53 after exposure to magnetic fields. Bioelectromagnetics. 2002;23:230-238.
32. Lin H, Opler M, Head M, et al. Electromagnetic field exposure induces rapid, transitory heat shock factor activation in human cells. J Cell Biochem. 1997;66:482-488.
33. Carson JJ, Prato FS, Drost DJ, et al. Time-varying magnetic fields increase cytosolic free Ca2+ in HL-60 cells. Am J Physiol. 1990;259:C687-C692.
34. Teodori L, Grabarek J, Smolewski P, et al. Exposure of cells to static magnetic field accelerates loss of integrity of plasma membrane during apoptosis. Cytometry. 2002;49:113-118.
35. Cridland NA, Haylock RG, Saunders RD. Fifty Hz magnetic field exposure alters onset of S-phase in normal human fibroblasts. Bioelectromagnetics. 1999;20:446-452.
36. Schimmelpfeng J, Dertinger H. Action of 50 Hz magnetic field on proliferation of cells in culture. Bioelectromagnetics. 1997;18:177-183.
37. Kumlin T, Kosma VM, Alhonen L, et al. Effects of 50 Hz magnetic fields on UV-induced skin tumourigenesis in ODC-transgenic and nontransgenic mice. Int J Radiat Biol. 1998;73:113-121.
38. Rodegerdts EA, Gronewaller EF, Kehlbach R, et al. In vitro evaluation of teratogenic effects by time-varying MR gradient fields on fetal human fibroblasts. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000;12:150-156.
39. IEC International Standard. Particular Requirements for the Safety of Magnetic Resonance Equipment for Medical Diagnosis. Vol 60601-2-33. 2.1 ed. Geneva: International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC); 2006.
40. Murata M, Takigawa H, Sakamoto H. Teratogenic effects of noise and cadmium in mice: does noise have teratogenic potential? J Toxicol Environ Health. 1993;39:237-245.
41. Briese V, Fanghanel J, Gasow H. [Effect of pure sound and vibration on the embryonic development of the mouse]. Zentralbl Gynakol. 1984;106:379-388.
42. Wiskirchen J, Groenewaeller EF, Kehlbach R, et al. Long-term effects of repetitive exposure to a static magnetic field (1.5 T) on proliferation of human fetal lung fibroblasts. Magn Reson Med. 1999;41:464-468.
43. Yip YP, Capriotti C, Norbash SG, et al. Effects of MR exposure on cell proliferation and migration of chick motoneurons. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1994;4:799-804.
44. Ivancsits S, Diem E, Jahn O, et al. Intermittent extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields cause DNA damage in a dose-dependent way. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2003;76:431- 436